1

River monitoring in the EU Water Resources Framework Directive

(WFD)

by Prof Maria Lazaridou-DimitriadouEmail: mlazarid@bio.auth.gr

Department of Zoology, AUTH, 54006 Thessaloniki, GREECE

2

How the WFD will work?The new Directive represents an ambitious and innovative approach to water management. Key elements of the legislation include:

• The protection of all waters - rivers, lakes, coastal waters and groundwaters.

• The setting of ambitious objectives to ensure that all waters meet “good status” by 2015.

• The requirement for cross border co-operation between countries and all involved parties.

• Ensuring the active participation of all stakeholders, including NGOs and local communities, in water management activities.

• Requiring water pricing policies and ensuring that the polluter pays.

• Balancing the interests of the environment with those who depend on it. So

3

Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)• Protects all waters: groundwater and surface waters,

including coastal waters

• Good water status (environmental objective) by December 2015 and effective river basin management plans (RBMP)

• The Ecological status of aquatic ecosystems is emphasised– Quality is measured in ecological terms

4

Ecological quality elementsMS must monitor parameters indicative of the status of

each of the following relevant river quality elements:

• Biological: fish, benthic invertebrate fauna, aquatic flora

• Hydromorphological: hydrological regime (quantity & dynamics of water flow, connection to groundwater), river continuity, depth and width, river bed structure, riparian zone structure

• Physico-chemical: thermal & oxygenation conditions, salinity, acidification status, nutrients, priority substances, other pollutants discharged in significant quantities

5

Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)• Water pricing as an incentive for the wise use of water

• Getting citizens more closely involved into planning and decision taking processes

• Streamlining legislation

6

River monitoring in the WFD• It covers volume and rate of flow, chemical status and

ecological status/potential• Preliminary assessment of human impacts (end 2004)• Accomodate monitoring programmes according to WFD

(by end 2006)• Maps produced and first results presented (by end 2009,

publication of RBMP)• Presentation of monitoring results in the first RBMP

update (by end of 2015 and every 6 yr. after that)

[WFD Art.8 and Annex V (section 1.3 and 1.1, 1.2)]

7

Deadlines• December 2003. National and regional laws to be adapted to the

WFD. River Basin co-operation to be made operational.

• December 2004. An analysis of pressures and impacts on our waters has to be completed including an economic analysis.

• December 2006. Monitoring programmes have to be operational as a basis for the water management.

• December 2008. River Basin Management plans presented to the public.

• December 2009. Publishing first River Basin Management Plans.

• December 2015. Water to meet “good status”.

8

WFD River typologyWFD monitoring methodologies and measures apply to all

types of rivers • WFD classifies rivers into different types according to

ecoregions (25) and ecotypes (System A and B, Annex II)• System A classifies rivers according to altitude,

catchment size and geology• System B uses obligatory (altitude, size, geology,

latitude, longitude) and optional factors

Bes. pol. Kontrolle/Regulierung von MarktgeschehenBes. pol. Kontrolle/Regulierung von Marktgeschehen

Ziele mit Rückwirkung auf Struktur & RegulierungZiele mit Rückwirkung auf Struktur & Regulierung

12

Monitoring types• 3 types: surveillance, operational and investigative• Intensity of river monitoring is risk and pressure proportional• General set of rules on frequency for surveillance monitoring are:

biological parameters every 3y. (phytoplankton every 6 m.), hydromorphological every 6y. (hydrology continuously), physico-chemical every 3 m. (priority substances every 1m.)

• BUT countries can adjust frequency and timing according to specific conditions and needs

• Rivers providing drinking water monitored 4-12x a yearEuropäische Benchmarking aufbauenEuropäische Benchmarking aufbauen

Umweltindikatoren im BenchmarkingUmweltindikatoren im Benchmarking

13

Surveillance monitoring network• Why: - validate the impact assessment procedure

– serve as basis for future monitoring programmes, – assess long-term changes in natural conditions and changes

resulting from widespread anthropogenic activity

• Where: at points of significant water flow (> 2 500 km² catchment area)– at rivers crossing a Member State boundary, – at sampling sites identified under the Information Exchange

Decision 77/795/EEC

• How often: - Physicochemical parameters every 3m. (priority substances every 1m) for a period of one year, – biological and hydromorphological once in the 6 years of the RBMP

Systemwettbewerb

Systemwettbewerb

Marktmacht über mehrere StufenMarktmacht über mehrere Stufen

einmaliger Wettbewerbeinmaliger Wettbewerb

15

Operational monitoring network• Why: establish and monitor the status of rivers being

at risk to fail the environmental objectives– Monitor rivers that receive priority list substances

• Where: At sufficient points according to the sources of pollution/disturbance (hot spots)

• How often: frequency chosen by MS on a case-by-case basis. General set of rules for frequency should be used as a guideline

16

Investigative MonitoringWhy: - where reasons for any exceedances are unknown

- ascertain causes of failure of environmental objectives- ascertain magnitude and impact of accidental pollution

Where and how often: Case-specificSampling points and frequencies shall be set according to the problem identified

17

Methods of river monitoringFor sampling, sample handling, identification etc :

• ISO and EN international standards

– such already exist for macroinvertebrate sampling,

physicochemical and hydromorphological parameters

– for the other quality elements, such standards will be

developed under the supervision of the WFD

Committee• or equivalent national or international methods

19

Classification of ecological status• Rivers classified into 5 categories: high, good,

moderate, poor,bad• The undisturbed (natural) status serves as reference

(identification of reference biological communities for each type of water body)

• Ecological Quality Ratios: These consist of the Observed value divided by the Expected value as derived from reference conditions (0=bad, 1=high ecological status)

20

Result presentation• Results presented in maps for each River Basin

District• Colour-coded for the five ecological status levels:

Good

Moderate

Poor

Bad

High

21

Chemical status: classification and presentationTwo categories:• Good: when a river complies with all environmental

quality standards of Annex IX, Art.16 and other relevant legislation

• Failing to achieve good chemical status: when it does not comply with the above

22

Classification of ecological status• The ecological status will be represented by the lower

of the EQR-values for the biological and physicochemical monitoring results for the relevant quality elements (principle One-out-All-out)

• Intercalibration network to ensure comparability (by 2004). Resulting values for each Member State classification by 2006

• Important to select indicators for the biological quality elements (practicability and cost-effectiveness of monitoring)

23

Classification of ecological statusexample for the element: Benthic macroinvertebrates

High status Good status Moderate status

Taxonomic composition and abundance correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions

Slight changes Differs moderately

Ratio of disturbance sensitive to insensitive taxa shows no signs of alteration from undisturbed levels

Slight signs of alteration Major taxonomic groups of the type-specific community are absent

Level of diversity of invertebrate taxa shows no signs of alteration from undisturbed levels

Slight signs of alteration The ratio of disturbance sensitive to insenstive taxa, and the level of diversity, are substantially lower than the type-specific level and significantly lower than for good status.

24

Current River monitoringDifferent methodologies and systems in the various EU

countries

Most usual „problem“ is lack of coverage of biological parameters

WWF „Water and Wetland Index“ report (rough estimate) :• Good: SF, S, B (Flanders), DK, CH, EST• With significant gaps: UK, B (Wallonia), A, D, HU, F, SK• Moderate: GR, E, Bulgaria, Turkey

25

Challenges

• Assess existent information, resources and tools

• Remodel of existing networks

• Decide on most – cost-effective– practicable– best environmental solutions

26

On-going projects• Individual country pilot projects, e.g. Germany and

Finland• Project AQEM running at a European level

- www.aqem.de• Pan-European Working Group on Guidance to WFD

Monitoring– It will assist MS in their interpretation of the

general monitoring criteria and methods provided by the WFD (duration 2001-2006)

27

Pan-European Working GroupExpected Outcome:

• Recognise and describe the present monitoring network and organisation in each Member State

• Prepare informal guidance documents on:

– the design of a monitoring network (selection of monitoring sites, GIS representation etc)

– Monitoring procedures/protocols in accordance to Annex V

– Criteria for the assessment of ecological, chemical, quantitative status and ecological potential

– Monitoring data management